IN RESPONSE: SMALLER PROPOSAL DOESN’T FILL BIG NEED

The writer is responding to “A better idea, and billions cheaper” (Editorial,
UTSanDiego.com, Jan. 20), about an alternative tunnel proposal by the San Diego County Water Authority, other big urban water districts and Mayor Bob Filner to bring more water from Northern California to Southern California.

When a natural disaster occurs – whether it’s the tsunami in Japan or recent hurricanes in our country – the public expects officials to have planned to protect essential services such as water and power.

When I was a Santa Cruz city councilman, we had to rebuild our downtown after the 1989 earthquake. I know that such a disaster is not a hypothetical situation – it’s a matter of when, not if, it will happen.

California’s water system is vulnerable to a major disaster. Last week in his State of the State speech, Gov. Brown said: “(when the Sacramento-San Joaquin River) Delta fails, the disaster would be comparable to Hurricane Katrina or Superstorm Sandy: losses of at least $100 billion and 40,000 jobs. I am going to do whatever I can to make sure that does not happen.”

Californians agree that we must conserve the water we have; we must restore the endangered habitat around key water supplies; and we must maintain a reliable water supply.

Water reliability in California is determined by how water moves through the Delta. Right now, we rely on a series of levees to protect Delta islands, many of which are 25 feet or more below sea level. Future sea level rise, a superstorm or a major earthquake would inundate these islands and cause saltwater to rush in from San Francisco Bay. This would interrupt water supply to tens of millions of Californians for years.

Gov. Brown and Secretary of the Interior [Ken] Salazar have suggested constructing tunnels under the Delta to secure a water supply from the Sacramento River to the State Water Project. Although smaller than prior proposals, these tunnels would be big enough to protect against disasters.

Just before the governor’s speech, a group, including San Diego Mayor Bob Filner, proposed an alternate plan that also calls for a tunnel under the Delta – but at one-third the size of what is actually needed. A tunnel this size, which would move much less water than is currently permitted, is not adequate to protect California from a disaster.

Other parts of the proposal make sense: San Diego and indeed all of California would benefit from increasing water conservation, recycling and storage. These programs must proceed regardless of what is done in the Delta. But they cannot replace the entire Delta water supply, which will be needed by San Diego for the foreseeable future. The San Diego County Water Authority recognizes this continued need in their water management program.

This alternative is praised for being less expensive than the governor’s proposal. But, when California’s economy is at stake, we must focus on the value of what we build. It’s difficult to imagine seismically retrofitting a five-lane freeway in San Diego down to one lane and believing it’s a cost-effective way to plan for San Diego’s transportation future.

The smaller alternative would also cut out supplying water to California’s important agriculture industry, meaning urban users would pay more for water.

It is time for all Californians to work together to restore the Delta ecosystem, secure our water supply, be efficient with our water, and avoid the economic disaster that faces us if we do nothing. This is what California deserves, and what the public will expect when disaster strikes.